OT - a moment with John Palmer Re: [ga] censorship among root servers

[Joe Baptista <baptista@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Just to repeat my warning. Anyone willing to hand over resolution to
WorldRoot or INAIC (a.k.a. Public-Root) is playing with fire.

Once again John I ask you the questions I asked earlier. Why should we trust
you or Herman and his posse to provide us with DNS service?

Incidentally - who is this Herman chap. Does Herman have a full name :)

John I ask you to remain focused on the discussion. More discussion on the
topic and less advertisements if you don't mind.

cheers
joe baptista

On Sun, Mar 28, 2010 at 11:30 PM, John Palmer <
jpalmer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

>  This is what happens when you rely on one root server network. This kind
> of thing is bound to happen.
>
> If you were using WorldRoot (http://worldroot.net) or PublicRoot (
> http://www.public-root.com), you would
> not be having so many problems.
>
> My posse and I and Herman and his group of engineers have been providing
> alternatives for years,
> in spite of Joe's best efforts to destroy our work.
>
> We're still here.
>
> Our roots are still available.
>
> And we have many more TLDs than ICANN.
>
> Try lion-mail.net yet? You should. Works like a charm.
>
> Cheers,
> John
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> *From:* Joe Baptista <baptista@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> *To:* Hugh Dierker <hdierker2204@xxxxxxxxx>
> *Cc:* ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx ; Andrew McMeikan <andrewm@xxxxxxxxxxxx> ; Rod
> Beckstrom <rod.beckstrom@xxxxxxxxx>
> *Sent:* Sunday, March 28, 2010 7:41 PM
> *Subject:* Re: [ga] censorship among root servers
>
>
>
> On Sun, Mar 28, 2010 at 3:36 PM, Hugh Dierker <hdierker2204@xxxxxxxxx>wrote:
>
>>   Andy,
>>
>> Is it possible that this censorship and suppression of the people is a
>> good thing for the rest of us?
>>
>
> Hugh - we don't yet know what happened. And ICANN has been silent. It could
> be anyone behind this. I have seen some supporting evidence claiming it was
> the Chinese. But I won't put much reliance on that evidence. The claim is
> that a gateway in China did this. We know the Chinese run their own root
> independent of ICANN. Maybe this was just an accident and a faulty gateway
> leaked the China DNS. It could be anything.
>
>